A19563:1406
An answerAn aunsvvere
An answer by the Reverend Father in God Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and metropolitan, unto a crafty and sophistical cavillation, devised by Stephen Gardiner Doctor of Law, late Bishop of Winchester against the true and godly doctrine of the most holy sacrament, of the body and blood of our saviour Jesus Christ Wherein is also, as occasion serveth, answered such places of the book of Doct. Richard Smith, as may seem any thing worthy the answering. Here is also the true copy of the book written, and in open court delivered, by D. Stephen Gardiner ...An aunsvvere by the Reuerend Father in God Thomas Archbyshop of Canterbury, primate of all England and metropolitane, vnto a craftie and sophisticall cauillation, deuised by Stephen Gardiner Doctour of Law, late Byshop of Winchester agaynst the true and godly doctrine of the most holy sacrament, of the body and bloud of our sauiour Iesu Christ Wherein is also, as occasion serueth, aunswered such places of the booke of Doct. Richard Smith, as may seeme any thyng worthy the aunsweryng. Here is also the true copy of the booke written, and in open court deliuered, by D. Stephen Gardiner ...
London: printed by John Daye, 1580London: printed by Iohn Daye, 1580
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And yet he goeth about because he will make all thing clear, to answer such authors as the papists (he saith) bring for their purpose.1 And first he beginneth with S. Augustine who writeth as plainly against this authors mind, as I would have devised it. If I had no conscience of truth more then I see some have, and might with a secret §1wish have altered S. Augustine as I had lift.2 And therefore here I make a plain Issue with this author, that in the searching of S. Augustine he hath trusted his man or his friend over negligently in so great a matter, or he hath willingly gone about to deceive the reader. For in the place of S. Augustine against the Donatists alleged here by this author, which he would with the rest assoil, S. Augustine hath these format words §2in Latin Corpus dominum & sanguis domini nihilominus erat etiam illis quibus dicebat Apostolus; 3Qui manducat indigne, indicium sibi manducat & bibit. Which words be thus much in English: It was nevertheless the body of our Lord and the blood of our Lord also unto them to whom the Apostles said. He that eateth unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgement to him self. These be S. Augustine's words, who writeth notably and evidently, that is was nevertheless the body and blood of Christ to them that received unworthily,4 declaring that their unworthiness doth not alter the substance of that sacrament, §3and doth us to understand therewith the substance of the Sacrament to be the body and blood of Christ, and nevertheless so though the receivers be unworthy, wherein §4this author is so overseen as I think there was never learned man before the durst in a commonwealth where learned men be, publish such an untruth as this is to be answered §5in a tongue that all men knew. Yet Peter Martyr wrote in Latin and rejoiceth not I think to have his lies in English. I will bring in here an other place of S. Augustin to this purpose: